RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-optimization-03.txt> (An Optimization for the MANET Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)) to Proposed Standard

["Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[e-mail]>]

No, it updates RFC 6130. Yes RFC 7181 uses RFC 6130, but it’s not the only thing to do so. Marking it as updating everything that uses RFC 6130 is not what’s done.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Information Assurance Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: [phone] |  Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

From: Abdussalam Baryun [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: 07 November 2014 15:10
To: Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Thomas Heide Clausen ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-optimization-03.txt> (An Optimization for the MANET Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)) to Proposed Standard


*** WARNING ***
This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an external partner or the internet.
Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any attachments or reply.
For information regarding Red Flags that you can look out for in emails you receive, click here<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Red%20Flags.pdf>.
If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process<http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>.
The optimisation is only when there is link quality, the link quality is optional use within our standard RFC7181, so this proposal updates the 7181 while it uses the optional link quality feature.

AB

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 1:58 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Adrian Farrel
> AB
>> 2- The draft mentions in the introduction:- This modification is
>> strictly optional,
> >
>> [AB] the reviewer suggests to include in the ID-Abstract that this
>> standard is optional. It is not enough to only mention in the
>> introduction such important information.

> Good point.

The abstract does actually say "to permit", which indicates this is not mandatory. But we can add the word optional to that.

Regarding the title, there's a usual tradeoff between brevity (and it's already not brief) and detail. I wouldn't add the suggests "based on link quality" as that really adds nothing useful (it's not an optimisation based on link quality, it's an optimisation to remove a side-effect of the use of link quality). To be a useful lengthening of the title, it would, I think, have to mention something about the two hop neighbourhood. I haven't consulted with my co-author, but my proposal would be to see if anyone on the IESG has a problem with the title as-is.

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Information Assurance Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: [phone]<tel:%2B44%201245%20242194> |  Fax: [phone]<tel:%2B44%201245%20242124>
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687
********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************